消费者对犯错品牌评价的时间打折效应及其影响因素

The Influence of Temporal Discounting on Consumers' Evaluation for Brand's Failure and Its Moderator Variables

通过研究品牌犯错的时间打折效应,本文试图探讨潜在消费者(未购买者)对犯错品牌评价的心理倾向。实验1研究发现,随着品牌犯错事件时间距离的延伸,消费者对身体性危害-品牌犯错的评价不会改善,即没有出现时间打折效应,而对功能性危害-品牌犯错的评价则逐渐提高,从而表现出时间打折效应。但实验2研究则进一步发现,随着品牌犯错事件相关性的增强,功能性危害-品牌犯错的时间打折效应也消失。结论:潜在消费者对犯错品牌评价的心理倾向表现为"消费者防御",并且身体性危害-品牌犯错启动的消费者防御要强于功能性危害。

This paper aims to help companies to develop the effective strategies for repairing brand image and brand relationship. Ourtheoretical framework was based upon the premise that with the extension of temporal distance, the evaluation for brand＇s failure wasgradually enhanced, but self- pertinence would undermine this effect. In Experiment 1, 3 （temporal distance last week, two years ago and four years ago） x 2 （types of brand＇s failure： one is aboutfunctional defects, the other is about health hazards） between- subjects experimental design was conducted. It revealed that the maineffect of temporal distance and types of brand＇s failure were significant, F（2, 174） = 12. 299, p 〈 . 001, 72 =0 . 124, F（ 1, 174） =60. 074, p 〈 0. 001, r/2 = 0. 257, the interaction between temporal distance and types of brand＇s failure was significant, F（2, 174） =9. 649, p 〈 0. 001, r/2 =0 . 100. In scenarios of brand＇s failure which is about functional defects, the main effect of temporal distancewere significant, F（2, 87 ） = 18. 894, p 〈 0. 001, .q2 = 0. 303; specifically, participants in the level of ＂four years ago＂ reported a sig-nificantly higher evaluation than that in the level of ＂four years ago＂ , t = 2. 955, similarly, in the level of ＂four years ago＂ higher eval-uation than that in the level of ＂last week＂ , t = 3. 354, p 〈0 . 001, the results revealed that with the extension of temporal distance, theevaluation for brand＇s failure which is about functional defects was gradually enhanced; however in scenarios of brand＇s failure which isabout harming to health, the main effect of temporal distance were not significant. In Experiment 2, 3 （ temporal distance ： last week, two years ago and four years ago） x 2 （ self - pertinence ： low, high） betweensubjects experimental design was conducted. It revealed that the main effects of temporal distance and self - pertinence were significant,F（2, 156） = 12. 979, p 〈 0. 001, t =0 0. 143, F（ 1, 156） = 69. 210, p 〈0 . 001, r/2 =0 . 307. The interaction between temporal dis-tance and self-pertinence was significant, F（2, 156） = 10. 571, p 〈 0. 001, t = 0. 119. In the low level of self-pertinence, themain effect of temporal distance was significant, F（2, 78） = 18. 495, p 〈0 . 001, r/2 = 0. 322. Specifically, participants in the level of＂two years ago＂ reported a significantly higher evaluation than that in the level of ＂last week＂ , t = 3. 252, p 〈 0. 001. Similarly, in thelevel of ＂four years ago＂ we found higher evaluation than that in the level of ＂two years ago＂, t = 3. 252, p 〈 0. 001. The results re-vealed that with the extension of temporal distance, the evaluation for brand＇s failure was gradually enhanced in the low level of self -pertinence ; however, in the high level of self - pertinence, the main effect of temporal distance was not significant. Conclusion： When the brand＇s tailure is about harming health, consumers＇ evaluations are not influenced by temporal distance; theevaluation for brand＇s failure, which is about functional defects, is gradually enhanced with the extension of temporal distance, but onlyin low level of self - pertinence. So we come to the conclusions that consumers＇ evaluation for brand＇s failure had ego defense mecha-nism.